On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 1:51 PM Anne van Kesteren <ann...@annevk.nl> wrote:

> On Sun, Jul 12, 2015 at 7:49 PM, Jonas Sicking <jo...@sicking.cc> wrote:
> > I think we've already made that assumption given that history.state
> > already relies on this.
> Good point. I'm still somewhat skeptical of introducing new objects
> just for the purpose of grouping some properties if they don't serve a
> purpose on their own.

It is only used as way to group properties (perhaps similar to
ValidityState?) and to keep History interface clean and stack-like. If that
is not valuable enough to introduce a new interface then putting these on
the History interface is fine.


Reply via email to